Loading...
CC - Planning and Zoning Recommendation to CouncilSTAFF REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: 12/3/2019 TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Caleb Hood, Planning Division Manager 208-884-5533 SUBJECT: H-2019-0107 Street Length for Cul -de -Sacs LOCATION: Citywide I =1=114177 W1 1_1130 44 0 1 55 Legend A©a County Line Future yd Road The applicant, Todd Campbell, has requested an amendment to the maximum street length for dead-end streets (cul-de-sacs) allowed by Meridian City Code. The Unified Development Code (UDC) currently limits cul-de-sacs to no more than 450 feet in length (UDC 11 -6C - 3B4). The applicant is proposing to increase the maximum cul-de-sac length to 500 feet, or up to 750 feet with City Council approval. II. APPLICANT INFORMATION Applicant: Todd Campbell, Todd Campbell Construction, PO Box 140298, Boise, ID 83714 III. NOTICING Newspaper Notification Public Service Announcement Nextdoor Posting Planning & Zoning City Council Posting Date Posting Date 10/18/2019 11/15/2019 10/14/2019 11/12/2019 10/15/2019 11/12/2019 IV. STAFF ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATION Meridian City Code, 11-1A-1 definition of terms is as follows: STREET, CUL-DE-SAC: A dead end street provided with a turnaround at its terminus. Page 1 STREET: A private or public right of way that provides vehicular access to adjacent properties. The term street shall include, but not be limited to, a road, thoroughfare, parkway, avenue, boulevard, lane, place, or highway. NOTE: Historically, the City has not applied the term "street" to commercial driveways or drive aisles for multi -family projects where private streets were not proposed. The City generally discourages the use of dead-end streets. However, cul-de-sacs are appropriate in certain situations. For instance, topography may dictate that a road should not be extended up or down a hillside. Proximity to arterial and collector streets or other barriers like canals or railroad tracks may also provide some justification for not extending streets. These instances are limited in Meridian, however and in most cases other design options and layouts of the streets and lots are feasible. The Applicant is proposing a change to the maximum allowable length of a dead end street so Council can approve development projects that have been well thought out and designed, but, because of access limitations or other challenges specific to the parcel, would not be able to be fully developed because of the current code limitations. This change will allow property owners and the Meridian City Council more flexibility when developing parcels with access limitations. (See Applicant's Narrative for more information). When cul-de-sacs are allowed, the length is limited for a handful of reasons. First, there is a life - safety component. Historically, fire hydrants were located at intersections and the length from the hydrant to a structure at the end of a cul-de-sac was a concern. That concern can be mitigated, however by installing a hydrant down the cul-de-sac. Cul-de-sacs and the length is also a concern for emergency vehicles themselves. It can be time consuming and difficult to maneuver larger vehicles on dead-end roadways. There are standards for radii though, somewhat mitigating this concern as well. However, the longer the dead-end, the longer it takes for emergency vehicles to turn -around; the longer the cul-de-sac, the more time wasted turning around. If roads are connected, it provides emergency service providers (and others) multiple access points — two ways in, two ways out. Parking can also be a concern on cul-de-sacs. When cars are parked on a cul-de-sac it can be even more difficult for large vehicles to turn around. Maintenance of long cul-de-sacs is another concern. Similar to emergency service vehicles, it is difficult for snowplows to not only maneuver in cul-de-sacs, but it also limits where snow can be stored; residential driveways on cul-de-sacs typically take up a lot of the area at the curb and there is more surface area to plow — if they get plowed at all. During inclement weather, this can further exacerbate emergency services access to these properties (snow/ice covered roadways). The asphalt maintenance of cul-de-sacs is also costly to the public for the same reasons of maneuvering large machinery on curves. Nationally, and even locally, the maximum length for cul-de-sacs varies greatly. In researching this issue, Staff found the maximum length varies greatly; determining the maximum length for a community seems to be more of an art than a science. The context (rural or urban) is an important factor to consider though when determining an appropriate maximum length. The City's current standard of 450 feet is somewhat subjective, but is largely tied to the desire for shorter, connected blocks. The applicant's proposal, however, to increase the standard maximum length to 500 feet, seems to be in-line with what other cities allow. Further, this request does not seem to cause any concern for emergency service providers. In addition to changing the maximum cul-de-sac length to 500 feet, the applicant is proposing to allow up to 750 -foot long cul-de-sacs with Council approval. A connected street network allows traffic to disperse thereby easing congestion. It is anticipated that each single-family home generates approximately 10 vehicle trips per day. If there are several homes on a cul-de-sac, it could create Page 2 congestion concerns. Again, Staff is not overly supportive of dead -ends and can think of no on -the - ground situation where a 750 -foot long cul-de-sac would be needed. However, Staff is willing to support this request as it does afford flexibility in design, provided two conditions exist: 1) there are not more than 20 dwellings that have frontage or access to the cul-de-sac street, and 2) there is a bicycle and pedestrian connection provided from the cul-de-sac street. Just because the above design criteria may be provided does not necessarily mean a cul-de-sac over 500 feet is in the City's best interest. However, if the design criteria are present, it provides for some of the flexibility the Applicant is seeking while also providing the connectivity and neighborhood integration elements desired by policy. Developers and Council should use cul-de-sacs over 500 feet sparingly, and only when there is topographic or other physical barrier constraint. Staff finds that the following action items from the City's Comprehensive Plan apply to the subject Unified Development Code Text Amendment request (Staff analysis in italics): • "Keep current the Unified Development Code and Future Land Use Map to implement the provisions of this plan." (7.01.O1A) The City wants to ensure that its policies and codes reflect the will and want of the community. The proposed UDC amendment intends to keep the UDC relevant by reflecting current development trends in the City without compromising life, safety or the general welfare of the community. • "Require pedestrian access connectors in all new development to link subdivisions together to promote neighborhood connectivity as part of a community pathway system." (3.03.03B) All new public streets in Meridian are required to have sidewalks. This sidewalk network often serves as part of the overall pedestrian system, connecting neighborhoods to the pathway system and services. Cul-de-sacs diminish the ability to link properties. • "Require street connections between subdivisions at regular intervals to enhance connectivity and better traffic flow." (3.03.03C) Dead end streets directly conflict with this policy. Staff looks for opportunities to connect not only subdivisions to each other, but also blocks within the same development. • "Review new development for appropriate opportunities to connect local roads and collectors to adjacent properties (stub streets.)" (3.03.020) Staff performs this task with each new development proposed. It is not uncommon for Staff to require proposed cul-de-sacs to be extended to adjacent properties. • "Require the public street system to be continuous through each mile section. This does not preclude the use of traffic calming measures, nor does it imply the roadway have a straight alignment." (3.03.03F) While not directly tied to the subject request, this policy shows the importance of having continuous streets through neighborhoods. Cul-de-sacs can serve a purpose, but they should not be overly common. • "Provide the most efficient transportation network possible." (3.03.03) Staff is of the opinion that long dead end streets do not further the objective of having the most Page 3 efficient transportation network. A healthy community is one that has good connectivity between residential areas and community gathering places as well as streets that serve multiple users (City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan, Ch. 3, pg. 8). Residential areas should be interconnected to one another so roadway users — motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists — needs are met. Interconnected streets and subdivisions, reducing long isolated streets, help create neighborhoods. In summary, other design options can, and should, be used more frequently than long cul-de-sacs. That said, the Applicant's proposal to extend the maximum length up to 500 feet does not seem to cause any life -safety concerns for emergency service providers or overly compromise the connectivity or livability factors contained in City policies. Current City Code, the Applicant's request, and Staff's recommendation is listed below. Current City Code is as follows: 11 -6C -3B4. Cul -De -Sacs: No streets or series of streets that ends in a cul-de-sac or a dead end shall be longer than four hundred fifty feet (450'). The Applicant's proposed text is as follows: 11-6C-3134. Cul -De -Sacs: No streets or series of streets that ends in a cul-de-sac or a dead end shall be longer than five hundred feet (5001_or up to seven hundred fifty feet �750'� with City Council approval_ Staff's recommended text is as follows: 11 -6C -3B4. Cul -De -Sacs: a. No streets or series of streets that ends in a cul-de-sac or a dead end shall be longer than figufhti fifty feet (450five hundred feet (500',) except as allowed in subsection b of this section. b. The City Council may approve a dead end street up to seven hundred fifty feet (750') in length where there is a physical barrier such as a steep slope, railroad tracks or a large waterway, that prevents extension; and where a pedestrian connection is provided from the street to an adjacent existing or planned pedestrian facility. c. Cul-de-sac streets shall serve a maximum of twenty (20,) dwelling units. d. The length of a cul-de-sac street shall be measured from the near edge of right-of-waX to the center of the turnaround. NOTE: An exhibit (or two) depicting cul-de-sac design may be appropriate to include in the UDC as well. Staff will bring some exhibits to the public hearings. V. DECISION A. Staff: Staff recommends approval of the proposed text amendment to the UDC, as amended by Staff and shown in Section IV above, based on the analysis provided above and the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law listed in Section VII below. Page 4 B. The Meridian Planning & Zonine Commission heard this item on 11/07/2019. At the public hearing, the Commission moved to recommend approval of the subject ZOA request. 1. Summary of Commission public hearing_ a. In favor: Dean Waite b. In opposition: None C. Commenting: Dave Yor ag son d. Written testimony: None e. Staff presenting application: Bill Parsons f. Other Staff commenting on application: None 2. Key issue(s) public testimony a. None 3. Key issue s) of discussion by Commission: a. Allowing the extension of cul-de-sacs through alternative compliance. b. Cul-de-sac lengths and number dwellings that can be served from a single access per the fire code. C. Block length standards in the UDC. 4. Commission change(s) to Staff recommendation: a. Include graphic below with the proposed code change. 5. Outstanding issue(s) for City Council: a. None C. City Council: Enter Summary of City Council Decision. Page 5 C� ' 0�J 1�7.y i 1iJ tZ�le! 7\ : i[ K�]►� iu-1_-f.X [I]�9 310Oral 11 flol 500' Maximum Physical Barrier VII. CITY/AGENCY COMMENTS & CONDITIONS Pathway Connection, Typical Lot, Typical 750' Maximum With Council Approval As of the print deadline for this report, only the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) provided comment; ITD provided a "no comment" letter. VIII. FINDINGS Unified Development Code Text Amendments: Upon recommendation from the Commission, the Council shall make a full investigation and shall, at the public hearing, review the application. In order to grant a text amendment to the Unified Development Code, the Council shall make the following findings: A. The text amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan; The Commission finds that the proposed UDC text amendment complies with the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Comprehensive Plan Policies section of the Staff Report for more information. B. The text amendment shall not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; and The Commission finds that the proposed text amendment, as modified in the Staff Report, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. C. The text amendment shall not result in an adverse impact upon the delivery of services Page 6 by any political subdivision providing public services within the City including, but not limited to, school districts. The Commission finds that the proposed text amendment does not propose any significant changes to how public utilities and services are provided. Please refer to any written or oral testimony provided by any public service provider(s) when making this finding. Page 7